POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

While the 99% suffered hardship, a new study shows that the Fed propped up buddies in the banking industry and a vast shadow banking system far beyond what anyone has guessed.December 15, 2011

Speculation about the the Fed’s actions during the financial crisis has made headlines on and off again over the last several years. The latest drama occurred on November 27 when Bloomberg published an article, “Secret Fed Loans Gave Banks $13 Billion Undisclosed to Congress," which gives an account of the news agency’s struggle to bring to light the details of the Fed’s emergency programs. Bloomberg throws out some very large numbers, revealing that as of March 2009, the Fed lent, spent, or committed $7.77 trillion worth of aid to the financial system and that banks used the low interest rates charged on these loans to make an estimated $13 billion in income. read more:

First, let me thank the moderators for promoting this article to a higher level.Yes, I too thought it was an important discovery.

Now, let me say this:

After having given the matter some thought, knowing that much of what we're beingtreated to in the way of revelations etc., everything has to remain suspect, until itcan be properly confirmed. Until then, all we can do is speculate about what it mightmean and such.

Having read so much about the sub prime mess, as it is called, it occurred to methat the way the mess was revealed -- so suddenly near the end of Bush's term in office --I kind of had to wonder if a real market lock down would come upon us so suddenlywithout any kind of advanced warning??? The markets, being what they are, beingconstantly pored over for the least anomaly that might be an opportunity for profit.How could it be that there was no slowing of transactions in the prior days and months?

That led me to speculate that, the market lock up might not have been real, but somethingthat was planned, orchestrated to explain these huge and ongoing disbursements of cash. Exactly how expenditures of approx. 10 trillion dollars per year, starting a year into Bush's second term, is quite a puzzling circumstance, no?

So, it would be even more strange still, for banksters to be making ever more loans, even as they could surely see, that these expenditures could not go on forever. Shouldn't the first such disbursement have given them pause to reconsider free lending policies? If not, then surely the second should have. But, apparently no, they just appear to have kept on lending freely, right up to the point where the markets locked up. Suddenly depriving the banks of the cash they needed to make even more loans. Apparently 29 trillion dollars was not enough to solve the problems it was supposedly issued to do.

Well, I, for one don't have any answers, more information needs to come fourth. But it does make the idea of the bailout seem extremely suspicious. Where we go from here is anyone's guess. I also suppose that "conspiracy theorists" (lol) will posit that the money was paid in bribes, to keep foreign nations and their intelligence agencies, from jumping aboard "the 911 conspiracy train", so there's that.

so much of this depends on the premise. i haven't seen the $29T number anywhere, but have seen $7T and $16T. so what? really, asking al capone to show us his books gets us what? john williams' shadowstats site states that annual inflation is really 11%. if the worldwide economy is $50T (who knows, since statistics lie like a mf'r) then at 11% over 3 years sure gets you ~$16T. the criminal cabal controls the inputs and the outputs, so what kind of generalization can be made that is even remotely accurate?

bottom line, the money taken from me and you is going into somebody's pocket. everybody not in the cabal is losing ground economically. don't take my word for it, do your own research.